Putin calls USA a parasite on the world economy!

[SFandEE]

 
What's happening now with America is nothing more than greed manifested from the last 30 years, simple.
 
 
 
 
 

chart below. Country	Ratio of CEO pay to average worker pay
Japan	11:1
Germany	12:1
France	15:1
Italy	20:1
Canada	20:1
South Africa	21:1
Britain	22:1
Hong Kong	41:1
Mexico	47:1
Venezuela	50:1
United States	475:1

 
This was from 2005 and the difference has narrowed recently to a paltry 370% or so, God bless 'em.
 
http://www.cab.latech.edu/~mkroll/510_papers/fall_05/group6.pdf

Sadly those who are insistent the solution is a Republican president and getting rid of Obamacare maintain these CEOs wouldn't be getting paid 475:1 unless they earned this package.


They don't see a broken system.  They query "why would someone pay them this much if they didn't deserve it?"  There are so many better questions to ask especially in light of such proportions you provide.


There is an entrenched populace that prefer discussing politics over facts.  Certainly any Republican would be better than any Democrat.  What about the question--what if both are inadequate.  What if we need a reformer?  Who is that?  Praying Perry?  Jesus help this great country.


How pathetic the US must appear to other nations--even if they are less than us on the whole, to see such a fallen and corrupt nation in such a short period of time must be quite the sight for people not inclined to parrot nationalistic jingos.


There is no reason why regardless of belief system we cannot insist on a functional system.  Big or small, I want competent.  It would be nice to have leadership that didn't believe the world is going to end any day now and acted as if there are non-partisan improvements that can be made to this nation.  I appreciate Putin speaking his opinion of the US on the world economy and hope that external pressure will continue, since the internal pressure apparently isn't relevant to politicians--anybody see how messed up this situation has become.  American government antagonistic towards Americans.  BROKE and BROKEN.

[SFandEE]

Lastly, if he is so firm with his conviction, on his own as no one is stopping him for signing over 'more' of his annual take than the mere $6.9 million his accounting staff worked out to be his share. Heck, he can even do this silently without the fanfare of the media.

GQ this is a standard response from those who have this opinion.  Maybe he agrees with me and wants the corruption addressed before signing over the money.  Your contributions have been defensive of the status quo.  Is the extent of your imagination for improving life for Americans really just voting for a Republican?

[GQBlues]

GQ this is a standard response from those who have this opinion.  Maybe he agrees with me and wants the corruption addressed before signing over the money.  Your contributions have been defensive of the status quo.  Is the extent of your imagination for improving life for Americans really just voting for a Republican?

That's a fairly heavy-handed statement based soley on the presumption that maybe he agrees with you, no? What if he doesn't?
 
I'm no more a Republican than I am a Democrat...curious however - who did YOU vote for in 2008/2010? Curious mind want to know.

[Turboguy]

What's happening now with America is nothing more than greed manifested from the last 30 years, simple.
 
 

Ratio of CEO pay to average worker pay

Is the CEO of a major corporation deserving of less pay than a football player or a popular actor?   We talked about GE.  The base pay at GE is 3.3 Million and with good performance about twice that in bonuses.   He takes responsibility for 10's of thousands of workers and billions of dollars.   His pay would not even get  you an above average quarterback and a popular actor makes twice that per picture. 

[BC]

It may be his only chance for reelection. 
 
Me asks myself, "Is that what Obama has up his sleeve?"    He wants to take this to the precipice and then be seen as the savior while Congress is wrangling.  Smart man, smart as Brer Rabbit, outfoxing the Republican Brer Fox himself  (from Uncle Remus:  Brer Rabbit cries "Please, Brer Fox, please don't throw me into the briar patch.")   [Please, no racial slurs intended.]

He's a smart man Gator, well educated and IIRC a Constitutional scholar.  This is of course only one of many scenarios.  During the debt crisis he stated he would not attempt to invoke 14th Amendment powers to raise the debt limit and let politics take it's course, which is prudent. But once the State is in a situation where irreconcilable differences in Congress places the State in danger of great harm, it is an emergency.  World commerce would react quickly, in a very negative fashion which creates an environment where provisions of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act could be brought into play.. even within the domestic realm.  After all, a run on the treasury would not be tolerable.

Of course I could be blowing smoke and particulate out my ass right now for even considering such, so lets just hope for the best that Congress can get it's act in order - which is all Obama has been asking...

The Presidency is not a dictatorship, but it seems some may interpret Presidential powers as trump.  It is not so, but may be.. who knows..

[SFandEE]

Is the CEO of a major corporation deserving of less pay than a football player or a popular actor?   We talked about GE.  The base pay at GE is 3.3 Million and with good performance about twice that in bonuses.   He takes responsibility for 10's of thousands of workers and billions of dollars.   His pay would not even get  you an above average quarterback and a popular actor makes twice that per picture.

Non-responsive.


Perhaps I did not ask the question well.  If CEO capitalism worked the business would be looking for the best CEO for the least amount of money.


Don't think for a minute that the amount of money is the issue.  I fully understand why a professional athlete makes what they make and despise the comments about how irrational a professional athlete or actor compensation is compared to a teachers, troops or firemen.


By the way check out the former A's pitcher, Barry Zito who is now a minor league pitcher for the San Francisco Giants and look at his compensation.


My issue with CEO pay is not the amount alone--it is the amount relative to what a comparable CEO would earn.  Wall Street bankers are the best example of how the system is broken, but GE is good enough.


I doubt there are, but for those who want to know how I vote--if it isn't clear.  I vote for the candidates who are the most likely to reform the government infrastructure, work with people of opposing politics, and get out of the way of Americans.  Unfortunately I get to choose between two idiots because of the system.  Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina do a poor job of selecting good candidates.  I imagine the system is the way it is because it is the easiest to control and hedge.  I also have a bias now towards younger generations--I will likely never vote for a Baby Boomer again.  To this day, even Republicans, discuss reform to Medicare and SS to exclude the Baby Boomers--they have no ability to sacrifice even one bit on the entitled debt they voted for themselves.


[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnTuq7XuD8U[/youtube]


Here is one more piece of red meat with interest in corporate corruption.  I do not like the term Corporate Communism especially--but sometimes alarming terms need to be used to create a distraction when two parties are talking about insignificant matters.  Believe it or not I just found this the other day, but many of the points I have been trying to make are in this video.


I love that they discuss back-dating stock options--it is a very profitable way to cash in stock options and if you have never been educated about what these are and how they work (fail to work) in rewarding behavior that is not in the long-term interests of a corporation.

[Gator]

GQ,
 
Don't worry about SF&EE.  I already asked him and he did not vote for Nancy Pelosi.    Something about his stomach would turn.   

[Gator]

TAX THE RICH   (there are so may topics in this thread that I will strat adding headings)
 
 
 

 
 I disagree [ed. about Obama fomenting class warfare].  There have been rumblings since Reagan, ameliorated somewhat under Bush 1, and started again under Dubya.   It may be worse now, but I don't think that has to do with Obama, or Dubya, for that matter.   But I don't think it is truly "class warfare". 

Call it what you want.  Such talk is  not about making the pie larger; it is directed at dividing the pie differently even if it results in a smaller pie. Proponents of the latter have always whined, while most of us did what we could do to make the pie larger - the American tradition  - and take our fairly earned share.    Our President should be leading us to a larger pie rather than sponsoring an ideal that our wealthy citizens don't deserve what they are paid.
 
I don't subscribe to Bill O'Rielly, yet he perceives it as class warfare and compares it to the weekend violence in Britain.
 
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/oreilly/2011/08/11/bill-oreilly-will-violent-class-warfare-break-out-usa
 
Maybe and hopefully we we don't have physical violence, but some people will call the other class "corrupt."  Wait, we already have that here at RWD.
 

 

I think it is related to the debt crisis, and the fact that those who created much of the financial crisis felt no pain. 

 
Wow!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!   And who are "those" people?  I hope you have politicians at the top of the list.  And 'B' at the top of the politician list.
 

 

I don't think anyone stated taxing the rich would solve the debt problem.  However, it would raise more revenue than not raising taxes.

I think many feeling this have "Tax the Rich" at the top of their list and not much else on the list.   
 
Your Tax Arithmetic table is a good one.  Thank you.   It shows that raising the tax rate for those making one million by 5 percentage points (which I guess would result in a 20% increase in their taxes)  would increase tax revenues by $233 Billion. 
 
Fine.   I agree, that seems fair if the balance is done by spending cuts.   And how much deficit reduction do we need?  Just to turn the tide (not to eliminate debt), Simpson Bowles said we need $4 Trillion in deficit reduction.   
 
I assert that most everyone making one million per year would agree with the $233 Billion in additional tax revenue just from them IF our government cut spending over the next 10 years by:
 
                              $4,000 Billion  - $233 Billion = $3,767 Billion.
 
Taxing the rich is only 6% of the solution, yet the Democrats want to start there before touching entitlements, big government, big military, tort reform, etc.  Do you believe the Democrats will make the spending cuts?   What say thee, noble Canadian counselor?

[BC]

The health care industry has exemption from anti-trust legislation that has been bought to create an unfavorable market for consumers.

http://salem-news.com/articles/may082010/health-antitrust-re.php

IMHO this is not insignificant.  Any candidate worth his/her salt should be addressing this directly.

[SFandEE]

IMHO this is not insignificant.  Any candidate worth his/her salt should be addressing this directly.

I think a party (Republic/conservative) that is for the free market and against "Obamacare".  Should have offered the removal of this trust protection for the health care industry.  Instead a Democrat from Oregon--Wyden submitted the proposal.  It was defeated, not because it isn't a good idea and in the best interest of Americans, but because the lobbyists for the healthcare industry are powerful (they write American law) and have corrupted politicians in both parties in order to exploit Americans through their unfair/unfree trade practices in the health care market.


Those who hate Obamacare--what have you done to rid the market of this parasitic/monopolistic behavior?  Complain about Obamacare--that's the solution?!!

[Boethius]

Do you believe the Democrats will make the spending cuts?   What say thee, noble Canadian counselor?

At some point, they will have to do so (and it will have to be both parties, not just the Democrats).    Realistically, you need to cut spending and raise taxes.  It will be painful.  It was for Canadians, who suffered for more than a decade with a dollar that was at historic lows (60 cents US, now trading at between par and slightly above), marginal tax rates exceeding 40% for the middle class and over 50% for high income earners, increased consumption taxes on gas, alcohol, tobacco, etc., duties of over 15% for imported goods, and clawbacks on pension supplements for high income earners.  Are Americans ready for that type of sacrifice?  Even reading this forum, one sees a lot of attitudes of entitlement, and I think that is pretty common now in some parts of U.S. society. 
 
It was actually a Liberal (far, far more liberal than any of your Democrats - practically socialists by US standards) who balanced the budget (Finance Minister Paul Martin, in Prime Minister Jean Chretien's cabinet), though some of the "structure" was put in place by Mulroney (including NAFTA and the introduction of GST, though that was blind luck - GST was introduced to replace a distorting federal sales tax on manufactured goods, which was at 13%).  Still, there is far too big a bureaucracy in Canada, and that will likely be a target at some point in the future.
 
 
 

[BC]

At some point, they will have to do so (and it will have to be both parties, not just the Democrats).    Realistically, you need to cut spending and raise taxes.  It will be painful.  It was for Canadians, who suffered for more than a decade with a dollar that was at historic lows (60 cents US, now trading at between par and slightly above), marginal tax rates exceeding 40% for the middle class and over 50% for high income earners, increased consumption taxes on gas, alcohol, tobacco, etc., duties of over 15% for imported goods, and clawbacks on pension supplements for high income earners.  Are Americans ready for that type of sacrifice?  Even reading this forum, one sees a lot of attitudes of entitlement, and I think that is pretty common now in some parts of U.S. society. 
 
It was actually a Liberal (far, far more liberal than any of your Democrats - practically socialists by US standards) who balanced the budget (Finance Minister Paul Martin, in Prime Minister Jean Chretien's cabinet), though some of the "structure" was put in place by Mulroney (including NAFTA and the introduction of GST, though that was blind luck - GST was introduced to replace a distorting federal sales tax on manufactured goods, which was at 13%).  Still, there is far too big a bureaucracy in Canada, and that will likely be a target at some point in the future.

The US is one of the few nations without a VAT/GST tax.  I see such on the horizon.

[acctBill]

Is the CEO of a major corporation deserving of less pay than a football player or a popular actor?   We talked about GE.  The base pay at GE is 3.3 Million and with good performance about twice that in bonuses.   He takes responsibility for 10's of thousands of workers and billions of dollars.   His pay would not even get  you an above average quarterback and a popular actor makes twice that per picture.

Turboguy base pay is a misleading indicator of CEO performance.  Base pay of  CEO is taxed at a much higher rate than other forms of CEO pay.  Stock awards, typically make up the bulk of CEO pay and are taxed at a much lower personal income rate.  For example, R.W. Tillerson, CEO and chairman of Exxon Mobil Corporation earned just over $2 million in 2009 (even less in earlier years), plus a $2.4 million bonus and a whopping $16,963,875 in stock awards, plus $5,455,517 in pension and deferred compensation, plus $280,925 other compensation for a total annual compensation of $27,168,317.  Notice that more than half of Tillerson's compensation is in stock awards, taxed at about 15%.   

http://www.companypay.com/executive/compensation/exxon-mobil-corp.asp?yr=2010

[SFandEE]

Turboguy base pay is a misleading indicator of CEO performance.  Base pay of  CEO is taxed at a much higher rate than other forms of CEO pay.  Stock awards, typically make up the bulk of CEO pay and are taxed at a much lower personal income rate.  For example, R.W. Tillerson, CEO and chairman of Exxon Mobil Corporation earned just over $2 million in 2009 (even less in earlier years), plus a $2.4 million bonus and a whopping $16,963,875 in stock awards, plus $5,455,517 in pension and deferred compensation, plus $280,925 other compensation for a total annual compensation of $27,168,317.  Notice that more than half of Tillerson's compensation is in stock awards, taxed at about 15%.   

http://www.companypay.com/executive/compensation/exxon-mobil-corp.asp?yr=2010

Now for those who love the theoretical free market of oil.


What did this guy do?  Sit on one of six oil companies that rose with the oil tide?  Which competitor did he put out of business?  Which market did he take over by improving customer care?  He did nothing.  His stock increased during a time of energy exploitation.


I would maintain the main thing he did was continue to secure his business relationship to make sure the US marines and navy secured his oil distribution lines for far less than what he would have to pay if he managed these privately.

http://theeprovocateur.blogspot.com/2008/06/big-oil-is-corrupt-economic-argument.html

Oil is so very, very dirty.  Such a corrupt business.


http://harpers.org/archive/2010/05/hbc-90007021

[Gator]

SF&EE,
 
You make an excellent point about the anti-trust protection of the health care industry.  Then you complain about Exxon's CEO.  Exxon is the largest corporation in the world (Apple should pass them soon).  Should not the CEO of Exxon be compensated handsomely?  They invest $30 billion per year in capital projects with a long term payback.    In such a corporate environment, there are so many hungry wolves who would plot to take his place  if he indeed "did nothing" using your words. 

[Faux Pas]

The Exxon example a good example of what appears to us "little people" as an outrageous compensation plan. To think a CEO of a major corporation does nothing is a fallacy. Good CEOs are rare and as or more valuable to a big corporation as a star athlete is to a professional sports team. The chair of CEO is a difficult one, requiring experience in one's particular industry, savvy enough to appease a Board of Directors, stockholders and employees, navigate Wall Street and other investors and maintain an acceptable stock price legally, can be quite an impossible task. Contrary to popular belief, not just anyone can do that.


I have no sympathy for any CEO on the planet. Most are well compensated but, to write off their usefulness to a company is only fooling yourself. It's all relative

[Gator]

At some point, they will have to do so (and it will have to be both parties, not just the Democrats).    Realistically, you need to cut spending and raise taxes.  It will be painful. 

 
This chart shows some of the pain, especially the amount of tax increases needed.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Estimated_Funding_Gaps_in_Medicare_and_Social_Security_Programs.png
 
From what I gather the aging of the population accounts for less than 25% of the increase in medicare total costs.  Growth in unit costs (testing, administration, procedures, etc.) is the primary problem, and such can be improved without additional taxes. 
 
Personally, I don't know much about healthcare so I will not comment much.  I am on medicare, yet only used it once when I was in an accident in December.   Based on that experience the doctors and hospitals did not get paid very much by medicare.  I do not understand why Medicare is broke.

[SFandEE]

The Exxon example a good example of what appears to us "little people" as an outrageous compensation plan. To think a CEO of a major corporation does nothing is a fallacy. Good CEOs are rare and as or more valuable to a big corporation as a star athlete is to a professional sports team. The chair of CEO is a difficult one, requiring experience in one's particular industry, savvy enough to appease a Board of Directors, stockholders and employees, navigate Wall Street and other investors and maintain an acceptable stock price legally, can be quite an impossible task. Contrary to popular belief, not just anyone can do that.


I have no sympathy for any CEO on the planet. Most are well compensated but, to write off their usefulness to a company is only fooling yourself. It's all relative

My emotions find me understating the value of a CEO--their relative value is the issue. 


I do not see a good CEO as the equivalent of a star athlete.   i do not see a negotiated contract indicative of good performance.  If you guys really think Exxon is a well run company and that is why they have profits the way the do, we will just have to disagree.


Exxon is a leech.  If there were really a free market in this industry--oil would be a lot less.  The skill set that is being rewarded is the ability to maintain a monopolistic/oligarchy position in the world economy.  Bribing is a skill set I guess--corrupting is a skill set I guess.  Spilling  oil in the Gulf of Mexico and killing your employees is  a skill set I guess.


Please show me some market indicator that the CEO did in his industry to improve the product or service that resulted in a better energy market and a competitive advantage.  Apart from pretty much getting the Supreme Court to over turn their punishment for polluting the Pacific Ocean in Alaska.  Now that is good business right?  Who paid--the consumer.  Who was rewarded--the CEO.  Things better?  Oil cheaper?  Is Exxon leading on anything on this tired old industry apart from corruption?  I can't think of anything they are doing to change the energy equation in the US.


http://news.yahoo.com/golden-decade-defense-companies-ending-195617808.html


Did you or your CEO profit off of war between 2000 and 2010.  It was all on debt--first off the books, now on them.  Who is to blame for this debt exactly?  What did we get for this debt?  Did we invest in the Middle East.  Was that the best short-term investment or were we using debt for the wild-ass guess investment.

[GQBlues]

Corporate corruptions. Yup al'right.
 
You want to see real corporate corruption? Find out exactly how GM paid back the US taxpayer's bailout money, and guess who was behind that silliness. To make matters worst, they (GM) even took an ad campaign and aired it to the public how they were paying back the TARP bailout - 5 years ahead of time. LOL, but hey, why implicate UAW's CEOs as being a part of the whole. Whitacre/Gettlefinger are unlike many of these other so-called corporate CEOs, you know. They have the White House behind them for support in return of their very generous, unenviable election campaign donations....
 
They took funds from the bailout fund to pay back the bailout they borrowed so far with the State Treasury's knowledge, and heralded...(paraphrased) "at least we're making an attempt to pay it back instead of using it to aid us..."
 

 
Then to add comic relief to the script, a government official ( I don't remember which/who) claimed that while it's unfortunate the public will likely never recover the TARP monies it lent (gave) to GM/Chrysler (UAW), all in all (the entire TARP) the US taxpayers netted a profit....
 
Imagine that! LOL. It's actually funny if it wasn't so blatant...

[Gator]

Who will run against Obama?
 
I have expressed my positive opinion for Romney.  Sadly, it may be easier to elect Romney than nominate him. 
 
There are many intense campaigning months ahead, yet the person causing the most excitement is Rick Perry.  He is relatively unknown outside Texas, so for those interested in knowing more about this candidate, here is an interesting description written over a month ago:
 
http://williamhfranklin.blogspot.com/2011/07/who-is-rick-perry.html
 
It is of course biased in Perry's favor when contrasting him with Obama; however, it admits and discusses Perry's weaknesses.  A Perry-Christie ticket in 2012?

[OlgaH]

 I have expressed my positive opinion for Romney. 

And you do absolutely right thing! "Save your opinions and act professionally and don't be argumentative with the candidate." 



[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8cHiEGLEls&feature=related[/youtube]
 

[Misha]

Such talk is  not about making the pie larger; it is directed at dividing the pie differently even if it results in a smaller pie. Proponents of the latter have always whined, while most of us did what we could do to make the pie larger - the American tradition  - and take our fairly earned share.    Our President should be leading us to a larger pie rather than sponsoring an ideal that our wealthy citizens don't deserve what they are paid.

The problem is that for much of the last decade it was less a question of making the pie bigger but inflating bubbles IMHO that invariably burst; first the dot com bubble, then the housing bubble. Could the USA survive a new bubble?

[Maxx2]

The problem is that for much of the last decade it was less a question of making the pie bigger but inflating bubbles IMHO that invariably burst; first the dot com bubble, then the housing bubble. Could the USA survive a new bubble?

Everyone's going to worry about bursting bubbles after 2012.

[GQBlues]

If we do not change, we will have more Cowboy Poetry Festivals, a Senator Harry Reid earmark.
 .....

LOL. One of my favorite explanation for one of the programs infused on the Stim Bill (Stimulate the Economy / Create Jobs) was Pelosi's $ 335 million concoction for STD prevention to help stimulate the economy! LOL! 335 million! To think, we brokered our children's future to the Chinese to pay for this...
 

 
Maybe they should've set aside monies on the Stim Bill to find out what particles are in the Bay Area fog these people are breathing to keep this woman in her post.
 
 

[GQBlues]

The problem is that for much of the last decade it was less a question of making the pie bigger but inflating bubbles IMHO that invariably burst; first the dot com bubble, then the housing bubble. Could the USA survive a new bubble?

Housing bubble? What housing bubble?
 
Here's a 2004 Congressional meeting villifying the notion a regulation was direly needed to oversee Mae/Mac...
 

 
Then in 2008, the Queen Bee herself, had the audacity to step up on the platform and passed that silly hot potatoe.